Comments on: Laura Goodwin

By: Ashesh S. Ghose

Ashesh S. Ghose — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 14:21:06 +0000

There are 3 concepts
1.Mother goddess Laxmi pressing the Feet of Her Husband Lord & Master Narayan as He relaxes & reclines against His Divine serpent SheshNag on the Ocean of Milk Khirsagar
2. Mother Goddess Kali ,naked ,bloodied ,covered with limbs torn from Demons’ bodies ,garlanded with heads of wrong-doers standing angry & Triumphant atop Her Lord Shiva who is deep in Universal Cosmic meditation ,tongue sticking out in remorse @ having unwittingly stepped on Her Husband !
3.Lord Shiva & Parvathi comes together & fuses into One True Whole —half Male / half Female !!!
In the first Syndrome Laxmi si shown willingly serving Her Lord accepting Her inferior status as Her Master’s Serving wench happily !
in the second Kali is Supreme & Her deep in trance Lord lies not submissively but in a trance beneath Her Dominant All-conquering Feet !
In the third a balance is maintained between the Sexes & a fully evolved Whole is produced half -Masculine/half -Feminine !!!
thus instead of Female led or MAle-led we should ideally have couple -led relationships ,companies , families , economy ,political parties –in short a Couplocracy !
But it is probably an Utopian ideal

By: Luigi

Luigi — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 01:15:49 +0000

I have a problem with gynosupremacists, they claim they are for equality and yet they support a matriarchy. A matriarchy is not for equality, and no matter how smart or fair the matriarch are it will never ever be for equality. Beside, both war and social injustices are complex matters hard to solve. Just changing the gender of the rulet wont change so much. There will still be war and injustices, perhaps even more since men have a lower status.

And I am a bit tired of the old ‘patriarchy are so evil’ babble, this mantra is so old and rusty. Social structures are born out of need, not lust. Men in the past had to do all the hard work, and at the same time, protect and provide and die for the woman, who only duty was to bring children to life and look after them. After all thats biology. Women born children, men provide.

Yes women usually had perhaps lower status to some extent but the same goes for men. All men where either slaves, workers (and mind you, back in time before tecnology, the work was reaaaaally hard) or soldiers. Only few, whery few men (and women) were priviledged, and they were usually kings and queens.

So everytime I hear or read nonsence about patriarchy and the need for a loving matriarchy (why not a “humanitarian” dictatorship?) I want to poke. Loving matriarchies are a illusion just as the evil patriarchy. Low intellectual work and lazy thinking. Just the need to blame someone for ones disgraces.

Sorry not working.

By: wmtbottom

wmtbottom — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 19:23:27 +0000

Gynarchy is so great. The real Liberty for males and female.
I m a slave of Gynosupremacy.
Looking for mistress 24/7 or worship – marriage.

Gynarchy come true. Now. Men have to be enslaved or castrated.

By: Gruffalo

Gruffalo — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:23:40 +0000

Gynosupremacy: an ugly word for a bad idea.

By: Mule

Mule — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 17:33:08 +0000

I don’t believe in any kind of supremacy based on a person’s genetics. It doesn’t matter if the genetics determines skin color or gender.

Men and women are different. Period. In general, men do some things better than women. In general, women do some things better than men. However, I’m not putting down one nickle as a bet on individual performances on anything.

As a concept for jerk-off material, female supremacy is a good topic. If you are willing to suspend disbelief it can be a very enjoyable fantasy.

By: maymay

maymay — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 18:00:29 +0000

The problem with trying to “equalize” or establish some “balance” between God/Goddess or male/female, or even Yang/Yin essences is that we humans are anthromorphosizing something that is vastly greater than ourselves.

Not to mention the fact that not all of us want an equal balance of opposing gendered qualities to be present in our behavior or attitudes. And the point, of course, is that this should also be okay.

By: Tom Allen

Tom Allen — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 02:34:09 +0000

The problem with trying to “equalize” or establish some “balance” between God/Goddess or male/female, or even Yang/Yin essences is that we humans are anthromorphosizing something that is vastly greater than ourselves. We’re seekin some idea of balance that we’ve made up in our own heads. To assume that we, as humans, can understand this balance on so grand a scale is hubris. To want it for ourselves on such a small scale – and to ~~blame~~ lay the responsibility on our gods or our religions is small and selfish.